Amina's Retirement Options: Drawdown, Annuity and an Adviser's Incentive
Amina is 64 and plans to retire at 65. She has a DC pot of £320,000, a DB pension of £12,000 a year from a former employer, and a state pension forecast of £10,800 a year from age 67. She wants £80,000 tax-free cash to buy a holiday home and to draw £20,000 a year from the remaining pot. She has recently been widowed, has mild cognitive impairment and finds financial decisions difficult. Her adviser recommends a flexible drawdown plan with total charges of 1.8% a year and an initial provider payment of 3% to the adviser's firm. The adviser says the plan will 'never run out' because it assumes 6% annual growth. Amina's daughter is concerned about the charges and the sustainability of the income. Amina also asks whether she should take the tax-free cash as a lump sum or use phased drawdown. She has no emergency savings.
1. Compare the main retirement income options for Amina and assess whether the recommended plan is suitable.
Read the worked answer
Amina's secure income is already substantial: £12,000 a year from the DB scheme and £10,800 a year from the state from age 67. That covers many basic needs, so the DC pot is available for flexibility and discretionary spending. The main options are a lifetime annuity, flexible drawdown, or UFPLS. An annuity gives certainty and longevity protection but is irreversible and may be poor value if she has impaired health. Drawdown keeps flexibility and control but exposes her to investment, inflation and longevity risk. UFPLS takes 25% tax-free cash from each withdrawal and triggers the money purchase annual allowance.
The recommended plan has several warning signs. A 6% annual growth assumption is optimistic and not a guarantee. Charges of 1.8% a year plus a 3% initial provider payment to the adviser's firm reduce the pot materially. The statement that the plan will 'never run out' is misleading unless it is stress-tested. Amina has no emergency savings, and buying a holiday home with £80,000 reduces her liquid resources. Her mild cognitive impairment and recent bereavement make her vulnerable. The adviser should consider an impaired annuity quote, a phased approach, and a lower-risk drawdown strategy. The plan may not be suitable without a full suitability assessment and a clear explanation of the risks.
2. Explain the tax consequences of taking £80,000 tax-free cash and £20,000 a year, and how phased drawdown might alter them.
Read the worked answer
Amina can normally take 25% of her DC pot as tax-free cash, up to her available lump sum allowance. Taking £80,000 from a £320,000 pot is exactly 25%, so it is within the tax-free cash limit if she has not used any allowance elsewhere. The remaining £240,000 can be used to provide income. If she takes £20,000 a year from drawdown, the whole amount is taxable as pension income at her marginal rate, although she will have her personal allowance and the starting rate for savings may be relevant. Her DB pension and state pension use up part of her personal allowance, so some of the £20,000 may be taxed at 20% or higher.
If she uses UFPLS instead, 25% of each withdrawal is tax-free and 75% is taxable. That can be useful for tax planning because she can take smaller amounts and avoid paying higher-rate tax. Phased drawdown allows her to crystallise part of the pot and take tax-free cash in tranches, leaving the rest uncrystallised. That can preserve the tax-free cash entitlement and provide flexibility. However, taking any taxable income from drawdown triggers the money purchase annual allowance, which reduces her ability to make future pension contributions. She is unlikely to contribute again, but the point should be checked.
The tax treatment should be integrated with her spending needs. Taking the full £80,000 for a holiday home may leave her with less liquidity. A phased approach could provide the cash over two or three tax years, using personal allowances and avoiding unnecessary higher-rate tax.
3. Discuss the ethical and regulatory issues arising from the adviser's remuneration and Amina's vulnerability, and what the DC scheme or provider should do.
Read the worked answer
The adviser's 3% initial provider payment creates a conflict of interest. The adviser should disclose it clearly, explain how it affects the recommendation, and ensure that the advice is in Amina's best interests. The FCA's Consumer Duty requires firms to act to deliver good outcomes for retail customers, including vulnerable customers. Amina's mild cognitive impairment, recent bereavement and difficulty with financial decisions mean the adviser should take extra care to ensure she understands the advice, consider involving her daughter with Amina's consent, and document the suitability assessment. The adviser should not use high-pressure sales techniques or make unrealistic projections.
The statement that the plan will 'never run out' based on 6% growth is potentially misleading. The adviser should use stochastic or scenario projections and explain the risks. The provider should check that the application is genuine, that Amina has received appropriate guidance or advice, and that the adviser's firm is authorised. The provider should also consider whether the payment to the adviser's firm is consistent with its own inducement rules and whether it should be disclosed.
If Amina's DB pension were being transferred, additional protections would apply, including the requirement for regulated advice and the contingent charging ban. Here, the DB pension is not being transferred, but the DC pot is still a significant asset. The scheme or provider should signpost Pension Wise, encourage Amina to take independent advice, and consider a second opinion. If there are concerns about capacity or undue influence, the firm should follow its vulnerable customer policy and may need to pause the transaction.